MLB.com

"What would be the point of faith then?"

Blind faith is an ironic gift to return to the creator of human intelligence. (Anonymous)

Kenny

"Just because one thing happened before the other doesn't make the latter wrong."

If you are going to claim the former copied the latter, which is not possible, then you are wrong. Now, if you want to change your point and say Buddha was no Jesus, then that's a different line of reasoning, and that's fine.

Buddha was no Jesus. He was merely a mortal, a teacher, and a philosopher. As such, he is far more believable than a man-god born of a virgin, who later lived and died and rose from the dead. Oh, and he was really God all along.

Have you ever heard of Rabbi Nachmanides? He was involved in a historic debate with Pablo Christiani about Jesus' divinity. He said,

<"[... it seems most strange that... ] the Creator of Heaven and Earth resorted to the womb of a certain Jewish lady, grew there for nine months and was born as an infant, and afterwards grew up and was betrayed into the hands of his enemies who sentenced him to death and executed him, and that afterwards... he came to life and returned to his original place. The mind of a <Jew, or any other person, simply cannot tolerate these assertions. You have listened all your life to the priests who have filled your brain and the marrow of your bones with this doctrine, and it has settled into you because of that accustomed habit. [I would argue that if you were hearing these ideas for the first time, now, as a grown adult], you would never accept them."

I concur.

Kenny

One more Nahmanides tidbit, from his wiki page:

"Nahmanides went on to show that the Biblical prophets regarded the future messiah as a human, a person of flesh and blood, and not as a divinity, in the way that Christians view Jesus."

I repeat, human, not divine. And now for the coup de grace:

"He noted that their promises of a reign of universal peace and justice had not yet been fulfilled. On the contrary, since the appearance of Jesus, the world had been filled with violence and injustice, and among all denominations the Christians were the most warlike."

Jesus =/= Jewish Mashiach.

Kenny

"Because it is not faith when you have all the answers."

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. (Anonymous)

Kenny

"Well we don't have an original print of the bible, the oldest texts we have were written several generations after the original authors were long dead. Calling it 3rd hand information is being generous on my part."

I spent at least a dozen posts in an earlier thread trying to explain to him that the Bible was not, is not, and will almost certainly never qualify as "eyewitness testimony" (or even third-hand info as you generously suggest), but he never grasped that concept.

Kenny

Fair enough. I've just seen these disagreements carry on into other threads to the point where the arguments flared up almost every time one or the other would post. If you don't care, then carry on....

Kenny

You provided nothing other than your own words and a vague reference to entire books. I provided you with exact verses that disproved that a prophesy was fulfilled. Those books that you mentioned have no fulfilled prophesies either. In fact the Bible has over 700 of those. That is not a very good track record.

"Ok, but he is worshipped like a God, and it's false. Jesus proved that He did and does have power. Point? "

Wow.... Buddha is not worshiped, people try to follow his teachings. And what's false? Do you even know anything about that belief system? How did Jesus prove anything? I want real proof not just your words.

"You want to believe that Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies, but you're trying to bend and twist and contort the OT to fit your NT beliefs"

They accuse us of taking things out of context. Yet even the writers of the NT have twisted what was written in the OT to fit what they wanted people to believe. There are so many other alledged prophesies that are supposed to be in the OT that no one can find. In some places they take literal meaning while in others they say "you need a teacher to show you what it really means". Incredible! All these people have to do is start cross-referencing and read for meaning. I'd bet they are afraid of what they might find.

The Annotated Bible is an incredible resource. The information is practically an encyclopedic overview.

Years ago when I was in college, I used to sit in the quad and read, do my homework, whatever. Often, the peace was spoiled by some fire and brimstone preachers. They were always escorted by a couple lackeys who would stand by their side while they scorned us all.

Once, I talked with one of hte lackeys, and we disagreed about the meaning of this or that. I noticed his Bible had certain verses highlighted, and he clearly had learned those verses, but he didn't seem to understand the context, probably because he only memorized the highlighted verses.

After a couple frustrating exchanges, I finally pulled out my annotated bible and showed him one of the references to explain my point. He didn't know how to respond. He stood there, staring at the footnote references.

So I offered it to him. It wasn't cheap, but I thought it would be worth it to him. "Here, take mine. You'll get more out of it than I will."

He recoiled as if I had offered him crystal meth or something worse. Needless to say, he didn't take it.

Kenny

Your story exemplifies how brainwashed these people are. They are afraid to explore because their outlook might be changed. These threads have compelled me to research more than I have ever done. I have not actually read the entire Bible until recently. I can see how it is so easy to read one part and then forget the details later while reading another part. The annotated bible is a great reference as you say. It enables you to quickly cross check things. I am astounded at what I have been learning these past few weeks that has been generated through these threads. None of these things are ever mentioned by the religious teachers. I guess it behooves them to keep their people out of the loop.

"I dont dislike you kenny, but I am more than confident that you are a pawn for satan even though you have no allegiances to him, that much is clear to me."

:O

Ditto

"If you are going to claim the former copied the latter, which is not possible"
.
Where did I make that claim? I thought I made it clear that Buddha was no Jesus. If not, my bad.
.
Why does that seem strange? Jesus had to go through everything that we go through.
"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." Hebrews 4:15
.
As cedi and dave said, this is my last response in this thread too. No need to respond to this.

For myself it's good and yet I hate when someone tries to push it on you .

Yeah, it's a fascinating read, explaining things in ways you'll almost never hear in, say, a church setting. I read it for a lit class (the Bible as Literature), and the cross-references to other writings and societies were so revealing, and they opened up my world view tremendously. Why they keep in under veil is a mystery, one only they could answer, but your suggestion is just as likely as any other.

Kenny

"Last reply on this subject."

Promise? :D (JK)

"I understand that you do not believe, I also understand that you have no interest in believing and that what we believe is proof of our God, you dont."

On this point, I think we understand each other well.

"Im fine with your choice and to be frank, I have no desire to change your mind, we both know that there is nothing I could do to change your mind so why should I bother?"

Because it's who we are.

"I dont dislike you kenny, but I am more than confident that you are a pawn for satan even though you have no allegiances to him, that much is clear to me."

I not only have no allegiances, but ... ah, you know the rest.

"Have a good one."

You, too. Peace.

Kenny

Ditto.

"Where did I make that claim? I thought I made it clear that Buddha was no Jesus."

It's in the language. You called him a "pretender," which he never was, and never claimed to be. He came before Jesus (meaning he couldn't copy Jesus), and he claimed to be only a man and a teacher. He never claimed to be more. Jesus and/or his followers claimed Jesus was something more than a man and a teacher. So Buddha wasn't a pretender. Like I said, it was just the wording you used that got us off-kilter.

"If not, my bad."

No problem at all. At least we understand each other now.

"Why does that seem strange?"

God is all-knowing and doesn't "need" to "go through everything that we go through," because god is supposedly all-present, all-knowing and all-powerful. A god could make himself into a man just by saying so (After all, he's the "Let there be light"-and-there-was-light guy), so the concept of a God reducing himself to an embryo and going through the stages of fetus, infant, adolescence, etc. to finally begin teaching at age 30 makes absolutely no sense at all.

"As cedi and dave said, this is my last response in this thread too. No need to respond to this."

Oh, NOW you tell me. :)

Kenny